Member Discussion ~ SOP (Statement of Purpose)

[boston bean]

This discussion thread was locked by boston bean (a host of the History of Feminism group).

Hello to All Members,

I want to Welcome you aboard! I am very excited and pleased that we have a new group and a place to meet and learn and discuss issues that are important to us.

I would like to first, take a moment to apologize to everyone for my absence in the group since it was set up. It was just very bad timing for me personally. My father, aged 61, passed away very unexpectedly on March 26, and mine and my families life has been turned upside down. We are working our way through this very difficult time.

It helps that my father was a very loving, decent man who left us with many good memories and touched many lives. He lived life to it's fullest and loved his grandchildren more than anything. He was a family man through and through, and his presence in our life will be missed terribly. If he had a choice he would have never left us. But he would want us to continue on to be there fully for our children. He would want us to miss him though, he was a bit of a baby sometime, . So, I guess it's time to try to get back in the swing of things a bit. And believe it or not, it really does help to try and keep your mind busy.

So, with all that said, I think it's time to open up a bit of discussion for the group. I believe I might be able to give some time and attention to this myself.

As you all know, or should know, I do not intend to remain the unelected host of this group. At some point in the near future, when the group has its bearings, we will hold elections. As you know, mine, violets and hlthe2b thoughts were to be sure that all supporting members knew that this group was not to be run in a top down fashion.

We would like all members to have input into how we would like our community to be run. We do have a lot of unfinished business to tend to, like group rules, host rules and host elections and discussion surrounding the SOP.

I think it might be best if we started with some discussion surrounding the SOP.

How do you feel about SOP? Is there anything you would like to change? Is there anything you feel needs to be added to it? Any other concern or suggestions?

Once we come up with changes/build upon the current SOP, we will pin that to the top of the forum.

Here is the text of the SOP as it stands now:

The History of Feminism group serves as a safe haven to discuss, and learn the history of feminism. Apply the lessons of historical and modern day feminist struggles to current issues and events that impact women. This group will also serve as safe haven for women (and supporters of feminism) to openly and honestly discuss and learn how the patriarchy affects women individually and collectively.

Please discuss... be open and honest, say what you mean and what you want.

Thank you,
BB

[seabeyond]

1. i will be open and honest and... lol,

maybe not so laid back as in the past, or trusting. that is me being open and honest, lol. and i am sure there will be others if not all.... that are more able than i. i get that.

for me, and what i see elsewhere, the important point is a "safe haven" for women to be able to discuss. otherwise we may as well do our discussions in GD.

there are a lot of groups that are safe haven. i know how to step into these groups, and discuss respectfully, understanding i am walking into their room. i personally feel that for whatever reason, there are posters that dont feel feminists require the same respect. behavior they would not do in other "safe havens" that they feel should be allowed with us.

i think your SOP is good. i am not creative in this manner, so there is not a lot to contribute. but as a whole, this is my feelings.

and i am glad to see you back.

i fell in love with your father. listening to stories of who the man is. you honor him, with your memories. and he is always with you, all he gave you, for you to pass on, thru your memories.

[boston bean]

2. I agree sea.

I think a safe haven is very important. Some members might have some good ideas on how we can tighten that up a little bit, with additions to the SOP.

We don't want to be too fenced in that people aren't saying what they want or need. But we don't want to have disruptors entering the threads causing us issues.

[seabeyond]

3. don't want to be too fenced in that people aren't saying what they want or need

this is the delicate balance. because equally important to me, is our ability to accomplish and be successful with this intent. so important.

[boston bean]

4. good way to put it.

A "delicate balance".

I agree wholeheartedly.

I am really looking forward to hearing others ideas because sometimes someone can just think of something that you would have never dreamed of.

[TorchTheWitch]

23. ditto that

SOP looks good to me, and my only concern is having this place as a real safe haven.

[Tumbulu]

5. Very good SOP!

Thanks, I support it.

[boston bean]

6. Thanks for responding Tumbulu!

I am happy that you like it.

Maybe, many are just plain and simple good with it!

I assume, members will have much more to say when we start discussing what constitutes a member, group rules, and rules/process for hosts.

[redqueen]

7. I somehow missed this thread...

I like the SOP but I would most certainly welcome any tweaking which would keep the group safe from disruption.

[boston bean]

8. Thank you redqueen.

Like I said above, someone just might have some really good thoughts. And, importantly, we want to be sure that all here feel they are part of building the group.

We'll leave this open for a while, and then move on to matters I think will elicit more interest and responses.

[Violet_Crumble]

9. I like the SOP and can't think of anything to add to it...

I'd only be concerned if the SOP was narrowing the scope of discussion in the group, but it doesn't look like that's happened....

[boston bean]

10. Good point Violet.

I had a concern of that as well. So far, I think it is working well.

I hope that if anyone has any concerns or suggestions, regarding expanding the SOP, that they will let us know.

[hlthe2b]

11. I agree with you Violet_C.... So far seems not to be a problem

Discussions have been diverse and broad, IMO to date.

As I read the SOP, the only thing that occurs to me is member expectations re: civility and respect (i.e., giving each other benefit of the doubt). Now clearly that could go into a separate member SOP or left to be "assumed". I hate to anticipate anything but respectful and collegial discussions, but in the event we have some disruption emerge, it might be good to be able to point to that as an expectation for participation in the group. I know that I would hope that participants in this group would be open and honest, but also give each other some benefit of the doubt when misunderstandings occur. This might be particularly true if a more controversial issue comes to light or a historical theory on an issue is discussed in what might be meant to be a "devil's advocacy" kind of way, but one in which many find its premise offensive. . I guess I'm wondering if that should not be a more formally expressed expectation.

[seabeyond]

12. (i.e., giving each other benefit of the doubt)

wouldnt that be wonderful. should go on all of du, lol. yes. i think this reminder is good for all of us.

[Little Star]

13. Hear, hear.

[MuseRider]

14. I like it.

It is simple and speaks to everything this group should be. Thank you to all who have worked on this so that we could have this place to discuss these important issues.

[laconicsax]

15. I think that the "safe haven" nature of the group could be a little more well-defined.

A line explicitly stating that posters who don't respect the SoP or the safe haven nature of the group may be blocked from posting would be appropriate.

It isn't necessary, but may be beneficial.

[Little Star]

17. +1

[BlueIris]

16. I think we should make it clear that disruption isn't welcome.

I respect the desire of our members to be welcoming and to focus on discussing feminism, not the problems that cropped up in other groups. But I think we need to make it clear which attitudes and comments are not considered supportive of feminism (ie; "There is no patriarchy," and/or "I hate 'sex-negative' feminists.&quot

And about that "giving each other the benefit of the doubt" idea...while I can sort of get behind the notion in principle, I think anyone who posts obviously anti-feminist crap should get bounced immediately. No warnings, second chances, allowing the anti-feminists to whine, try to weasel out of what they posted, convince us they're somehow feminist anyway, etc. Blocked. A safe space should be exactly that.

Again, I understand those who want to keep this community fair, balanced, and welcoming to feminists who can get behind the mission statement in whatever form it may eventually take. I just can't stand the idea of letting disruptors, misogynists or abusers of any form run amok in here in the interest of inclusivity.

[seabeyond]

18. i really feel this way, too

"I think anyone who posts obviously anti-feminist crap should get bounced immediately. No warnings, second chances, allowing the anti-feminists to whine, try to weasel out of what they posted, convince us they're somehow feminist anyway, etc. Blocked. A safe space should be exactly that. "

i am just not up for game playing and there is so much of it. and i think we have seen it often enough, we know when it is happening. i agree. on this point, i think we need to be very harsh.

[hlthe2b]

19. Just to clarify, I was in no way suggesting obvious misgoyny/disruption be given "benefit of doubt"

only that in the context of speaking to the history of feminism, those who simply bring up older, perhaps outdated, or controversial theory or premises for the purposes of discussion, be given initial benefit of the doubt and not automatically and immediately assumed to be proponents of those views. That is really the only way one can discuss the more academic aspects of feminism-- to have that safe venue, fostered on an assumption of mutual respect.

But, again, my post was in no way meant to suggest condoning those who would come to disrupt based on denunciation of the basic premises upon which this group was formed--the SOP. I agree that this needs to be a protected and safe haven for our purposes.

[BlueIris]

20. Okay, good.

For the record, I also feel that people using antiquated terms should not necessarily be condemned outright...if the posters can show their hearts were in the right place. Context matters, after all. So does intention. Even I occasionally find myself using terms that are not considered current or part of the 'preferred' language used to discuss a topic or issue, so I know it's possible to have good intentions and still use less than wonderful words.

[redqueen]

21. Agreed. I'd add the denial of the existence of male privilege

to that list.

[MadrasT]

22. Hi BB and everyone

I like the SOP pretty much as is, and I am in agreement with the general direction of the additional comments made in this thread.

I want it to be a safe place... and I also really like the idea of making enough space to give people the benefit of the doubt. Sometimes folks can post things that sound like they are intentionally trying to stir up shit... when they are really just trying to understand. Yes, it is indeed complex and there can be a fine line between that, and genuinely intentionally disruptive behavior... but I hate it when I see someone get labelled as some kind of bigot or worse, when they are really just not quite understanding an issue.

Certain issues can seem extremely clear to people who hold those issues close to their hearts... while the very same issues can be quite new and confusing to other people.

That being said, serial disruptors and folks who are obviously hostile should not be tolerated here.

I guess am hoping we can have a conversational group rather than a confrontational one, where we might even "agree to disagree" sometimes without it throwing the whole group into chaos?

I am so sorry to hear about your father.

[TorchTheWitch]

24. one suggestion...

Could this thread be pinned to the top for awhile? I'd like to keep checking back into it for other peoples' thoughts, and I think it would make it more noticeable for new people coming in.

[hlthe2b]

25. I think that is a good idea... so having possibly read your post first, I'm going to pin it...

[iverglas]

26. one little suggestion

I believe it's possible to arrange for threads posted in this group's forum not to appear on the Latest page.

I would propose that this be done; any feelings, anybody?

[seabeyond]

27. upside, downside

so many people that would not ordinarily participate in this forum bring in their fresh thoughts when they see an interesting thread

upside/downside, lol

[TorchTheWitch]

28. I'm confused about what the upside is

But then, I never use the Latest or Greatest pages here anyway... I just go directly to the few forums I have interest in and see what's going on.

What would be the reason for not having posts from this forum show up on the Latest page? I must not be getting something. I mean, if a lot of people use the Latest page to find interesting stuff then why would we not want posts from here to appear there? Wouldn't having those posts on that page help people to find this forum and participate?

[seabeyond]

29. Wouldn't having those posts on that page help people to find this forum and participate?

Last edited Tue Apr 10, 2012, 08:00 PM - Edit history (1)

that is the upside.

the downside is, people will see a confrontational OP and come in and cause problems.

i tend to like lots of people in here with differing opinions and thoughts. i figure we have hard and fast rules for disruptors....

[iverglas]

30. I suppose the really problematic ones

will just keep an eye on the forum and seize their opportunities.

The Latest page thing isn't entirely a matter of attracting disruptors. Often, people see something there that catches their eye (especially if it's a slow late night, for instance) and wander over and don't realize what forum they are in. (This used to happen all the time with the Guns forum; some sane person would post a thought in a thread with a topic that looked interesting and immediately be set upon by six or eight "pro-gun" types, then look up at the top of their monitor and go Eek! I'm in the gungeon! and hasten to escape.)

So somebody goes to Latest (I'm the same, I never do) and sees a thread containing something they disagree with ... like, a feminist thought or analysis ... and bungs their thoughts into the thread, never having read the SoP. Their thoughts don't coincide with the SoP. And there we are, distracted by and replying to something that is irrelevant or misogynist or something in between.

Maybe we should just avoid recommending threads in this group's forum.


bad editing fixed

[seabeyond]

31. that happened to me

my first trip into gun forum. then when i said eeeks, in the gun forum, those 5, 6 people jumped on my ass for being afraid and running away

lmfao

[TorchTheWitch]

32. oh, I see

Ok, that makes sense then. Huh... so there could be good reasons for having posts show up there and not so good reasons as well. I think I'm kind of stuck in the middle of which is the better thing to do. I dunno, I'm stumped on this one.

Thanks for the explanation though, since I don't uses the Latest page or the Greatest page I've never really known that much about how they worked... I didn't realize that someone could follow a post on either page and not know what group they were going into or its SOP (something should probably be done about that since that could be a problem for a lot of groups).

[seabeyond]

33. we could look, lol. nothing to be done. but sometimes people read subject line

and dont look to see the room they are going into. i have learned to look. it is clearly printed above the subject line, what forum the thread is in. people forget to look, sometimes. maybe people have gotten better to look first.

[iverglas]

34. there have been a few examples of the problem here lately

The thread about RC nuns in the US, and in seabeyond's latest thread, for example. Honest mistakes in all cases I'm quite sure -- people seeing a subject, reading a post and replying as they thought reasonable, without noticing where they were.

Sometimes this is just irritating (pointless one-liners, not what I hope to see in this forum, anyhow), sometimes it is more disruptive.

I don't know what the best approach to the problem is. Removing the group from the Latest page? Asking thread starters to begin with a note that the thread is in the History of Feminism protected group and recommending that readers check the SoP? Avoiding provocative subject lines for threads? ... ?

[Violet_Crumble]

35. I don't see that there is a problem...

If someone wanders in from the latest page or wherever and doesn't realise they're in a protected group, the hosts would handle it. What I've seen in other groups is that most of the time people made an honest mistake and didn't realise where they were posting, and that's the end of it. For those who are there to disrupt, they ignore the hosts and keep on posting the same way, and they'd end up blocked. So I'm not seeing where the problem is that needs to be addressed...

I'm only speaking for myself, but I don't want to see this group end up so hidden away that DUers won't even know it exists. And I think requiring people to attach warning notices to their OPs is a bit over the top and would have the effect of discouraging participation from DUers who have just found the group....

[seabeyond]

36. personally, i enjoyed the

exploration of the conversation in my OP with the wandering duer. it allowed me to take it a bit further in exploration from that conversation otherwise i would not have gone. i agree that when you see a person persist and ignore the host, is when it is clear the person isnt here for a conversation, but to cause problems. i really do LOVE the way our hosts have handled it to this point, BB. lol. she is good. but, i know there are more threads where posters came in and read, made their comments and it enhanced our conversations. i dont want to lose that.

[iverglas]

38. well, there we are

I didn't enjoy some of the one-liners posted in the thread about RC nuns, plainly by people who had just wandered in from Latest, spouted an opinion that was in some cases unpleasant and in others unrelated to the topic, and wandered out. Fortunately, they were largely ignored.

And I certainly didn't see anybody "requiring" that anybody else "attach warning notices to their OPs" ...

[Violet_Crumble]

40. I'm still not seeing where the problem is that needs to be addressed....

If something that gets posted in this group goes beyond being something that merely annoys because of posting style or opinion, and is disruptive and/or misogynistic, then that's where the hosts step in. I just checked, and OPs posted in other DU groups that are safe havens all appear in the Latest thingy, and I think they deal with any cases of DUers wandering in (we're talking about ones that are disruptive and violate the SOP, not just ones that annoy individual members) as they appear. That's the best way to go, imo...


When it comes to requiring that people who start OPs attach warning notices to them, I was responding to this: 'Asking thread starters to begin with a note that the thread is in the History of Feminism protected group and recommending that readers check the SoP?' If someone's being asked to do something like that, they'll see it as a requirement, especially if they're new to the group. And why I called it a warning was that I assumed from reading yr post that the whole point was to warn people coming in from Latest that they were looking at an OP in a safe haven group...

[Tumbulu]

41. The hosts of ASAH (Astrology, Spirituality, Alternative Health) have been able to keep

Last edited Sun Apr 22, 2012, 11:48 PM - Edit history (1)

our posts from being on the latest and or greatest and any of the public places. It has made things far more pleasant (imo) as there used to be some rude posts.....

It is possible and I think preferable. My 2 cents.

[MadrasT]

37. I agree with VC and seabeyond.

I would rather deal with it on a case by case basis.

I don't *know* what all the feminist "dogwhistles" are. Even when I do recognize them, I often don't know how to respond to them because all I have is a gut level feeling that someone made a bullshit statement.

The conversation that unfolded in seabeyond's recent OP about the "assholes get hot girls" meme for example. I appreciate that some of us have been fighting these battles for years and are exhausted from responding to that. But I haven't been fighting this battle for years, and now I know more about what the feminist response to that is, and why.

I think the accidental wander-ins can be teaching moments. Hopefully for the accidental wanderers, and maybe more so for people like me who haven't already been fighting the fight for decades.

If it gets too frequent we might want to change it, but I am for leaving us on Latest for now.

I realize some of us are sick to death of hearing and responding to things like "girls like bad boys" but it is very valuable to me (who is fairly new to feminism) and I appreciate it.

The 100th (or thousandth) time you've said something (to where you think you'll explode if you have to say it one more damn time) is sometimes the very first time someone like me has heard it.

[seabeyond]

39. maybe more so for people like me who haven't already been fighting the fight for decades.

The 100th (or thousandth) time you've said something (to where you think you'll explode if you have to say it one more damn time) is sometimes the very first time someone like me has heard it.

this is a wonderful perspective. thank you for pointing this out. i am telling ya (actually said it in that thread), i did not know about all the "nice guys" and "girls like the bad boys" bullshit until i was on du and heard it repeatedly. the first couple times, i actually was empathetic until i started getting what was said and experienced my own son. hearing the same words coming out of his mouth. it was about that time, on another thread about nice guys, that a man said he was the nice guy, didnt get the girl, believe they wanted bad boys, until he realized those boys were putting themselves out there and he wasnt. it gave a lesson to my son.

so you are right. we forget. there are women new to this. and they need to hear it all over again, just like i did when i stepped in not all that long ago.

good point.

[redqueen]

42. Strongly agree. nt

[iverglas]

43. I guess I am on a different page

I hadn't thought of this group as a place to debate the fundamental principles and analyses of feminism with people who reject them.

seabeyond's thread "The gender gap: Messages that can affect the way boys and girls grow up" being a case in point of where an opportunity for serious discussion gives way to indignation in the face of intrusive comment ...

[seabeyond]

44. you are right iverglas. that is the point.

you are right. it is weighing losing people that would generate good conversation because they dont come into this forum, with people like gman.

[iverglas]

45. a request

I'd rather not be sending 3 PMs every time ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12551235

There is somone who has posted multiple times in that thread who needs to be blocked. The substance alone is enough, in my own view, but the attacks on regular members of this group and on entire groups of women/feminists that accompany it are way beyond the pale. Sole and obvious purpoes is to disrupt and denigrate.

[redqueen]

46. Yep.

It's screamingly obvious that honest discussion is not on their agenda.

[iverglas]

47. say thanks!

Thanks.

to you know who you are.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1255

[MadrasT]

48. Sweet.

That was ridiculous.

Thanks!

[seabeyond]

50. sigh....

i am glad you posted. i was wondering how you felt. and others. was gonna start a thread. i want this place to be comfortable for all, but i am not good without rules. how far someone can go.... how far i can go.... lol.

i am glad to hear your opinion.

[MadrasT]

52. I almost got in the middle of that bullshit 3 times

And I backed off before posting every time. I just don't have the energy or desire to engage with people who just show up to poke a hornet's nest and pick fights for the sake of picking fights. So I don't. (Usually, hahahaha.) Besides, y'all were doing a fine job of smacking down the bullshit without me inserting myself into the conversation.

There are ways to discuss other opinions without being as blatantly condescending and disrespectful and divisive as that poster was being.

I don't want to "shut up 3rd wavers" or whatever, but we don't need that kind of hostile shit stirring.

The sheer audacity of coming in here to "remind" us of anything, when not a host or even any kind of regular participant of the group, is beyond the pale.

[iverglas]

54. I stayed right out ... and came here ;)

That is not what this forum is for. Period.

[MadrasT]

57. Good call.

Once I saw your post and redqueen's second, it didn't seem necessary to "third" it.

[seabeyond]

55. thanks. that is how i often see it

when there are people going at it, i dont often step in. for the reasons you say.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12551236

i think it is real clear when a poster is asking for clarification and conversation and flat out being disruptive.

[redqueen]

49. Thanks!

[seabeyond]

51. btw... on one of the juries i sent thru, the reason the said leave it

was cause we are "talking" about the SoP so we really dont have one yet, so no one is "really" breaking the rules.

how about that one.

[laconicsax]

53. Juries thrive on excuses.

I've seen the following types excuses for of juror:

In the category of "It's fine but I don't like it," some excuses or voting to hide have been:

-The post could have been worded better.
-The poster used profanity.
-I'm going to teach the DUer/group I don't like a lesson/give them a taste of their own medicine.

In the category of "it's obviously unacceptable, but I like it..."

-You should confront
-"just an opinion"

And now "it's technically ok"

[seabeyond]

56. or bitchy snot rocket... lol ya, i know. nt

[BlueIris]

59. The bulk of all the offensive crap that stays up

stays up because of the "no censorship, even of offensive material" crowd. They are pathetic and an embarrassment to this community.

[laconicsax]

61. One of several groups to deserve that description.

Here's an interesting thought:

Suppose someone alerted on your post. Would it get hidden for criticizing the no censorship crowd?

[BlueIris]

62. Probably.

IIRC, some of Admin's stated reasons for going to the jury "system" was to prevent excessive alerting from people desperate to represent an agenda. It's too bad it's being abused by those it was meant to eliminate.

[BlueIris]

58. I don't bother with the juries anymore.

They are a joke. So much disgusting, offensive and flat out wrong content stays up on these boards after juries fail to 'see' it. It is appalling.

[seabeyond]

60. true that. so very true.

and sexist and misogynist shit seem to be the favorite to let slide.

[iverglas]

63. another request

We are being monitored and instructed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12551349

[boston bean]

64. message

Here is the OP for this thread. Locking as we have pinned the Group SOP.

Member Discussion ~ SOP (Statement of Purpose) [View all]
Last edited Thu Apr 5, 2012, 04:54 PM USA/ET - Edit history (2)

Hello to All Members,

I want to Welcome you aboard! I am very excited and pleased that we have a new group and a place to meet and learn and discuss issues that are important to us.

I would like to first, take a moment to apologize to everyone for my absence in the group since it was set up. It was just very bad timing for me personally. My father, aged 61, passed away very unexpectedly on March 26, and mine and my families life has been turned upside down. We are working our way through this very difficult time.

It helps that my father was a very loving, decent man who left us with many good memories and touched many lives. He lived life to it's fullest and loved his grandchildren more than anything. He was a family man through and through, and his presence in our life will be missed terribly. If he had a choice he would have never left us. But he would want us to continue on to be there fully for our children. He would want us to miss him though, he was a bit of a baby sometime, . So, I guess it's time to try to get back in the swing of things a bit. And believe it or not, it really does help to try and keep your mind busy.

So, with all that said, I think it's time to open up a bit of discussion for the group. I believe I might be able to give some time and attention to this myself.

As you all know, or should know, I do not intend to remain the unelected host of this group. At some point in the near future, when the group has its bearings, we will hold elections. As you know, mine, violets and hlthe2b thoughts were to be sure that all supporting members knew that this group was not to be run in a top down fashion.

We would like all members to have input into how we would like our community to be run. We do have a lot of unfinished business to tend to, like group rules, host rules and host elections and discussion surrounding the SOP.

I think it might be best if we started with some discussion surrounding the SOP.

How do you feel about SOP? Is there anything you would like to change? Is there anything you feel needs to be added to it? Any other concern or suggestions?

Once we come up with changes/build upon the current SOP, we will pin that to the top of the forum.

Here is the text of the SOP as it stands now:


The History of Feminism group serves as a safe haven to discuss, and learn the history of feminism. Apply the lessons of historical and modern day feminist struggles to current issues and events that impact women. This group will also serve as safe haven for women (and supporters of feminism) to openly and honestly discuss and learn how the patriarchy affects women individually and collectively.


Please discuss... be open and honest, say what you mean and what you want.

Thank you,
BB